With current events stirring up global energy prices, corn ethanol is once again being dressed up as if it is a domestic energy source and agent of energy security.
The truth is that it takes more fossil fuel energy to make a gallon of corn ethanol than a gallon of gasoline. It is time to face this unpleasant truth and the other perverse outcomes achieved by 20 years of misguided policy.
Biofuels in general are just a way to put a green fig leaf on petroleum by rerouting it through a farm field.
In 2005 and 2007, Congress passed the Energy Policy and Energy Independence and Security Acts that together created the Renewable Fuel Standard program. RFS had three stated objectives: to improve U.S. energy security, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and to support rural economies and agricultural development.
Instead, RFS has increased motor fuel prices, increased food prices, put millions of carbon-sequestering acres of land into intensive cultivation, increased greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, and increased water consumption and pollution.
The gallons of U.S. gasoline displaced by federal ethanol blending mandates are being exported to Mexico and other nations. The great success of RFS has been the hand of the government transferring wealth from motorists to big agriculture corporations.
The government wanted biofuels bad, and it got them bad. Under Corn Belt lobbying pressure, Congress waived the need for RFS to achieve actual greenhouse gas reductions for all existing corn ethanol biorefineries, plus all that could be built by the end of 2010.
The bulk of the corn ethanol produced over the past 20 years and today comes from these waivered plants. The EPA’s specious 2010 prediction that corn ethanol would achieve a 21% greenhouse gas reduction by 2022 was immediately challenged by the National Research Council for not properly counting land-use change and not realistically treating food competition and water use.
This panel of experts from the National Academy of Sciences even questioned the viability of the entire concept of reducing greenhouse gas with biofuels. The most rigorous and honest estimate by a third party in testimony before Congress used the EPA’s own methodology to show that adding corn ethanol to gasoline has increased greenhouse emissions by 28% over the pure gasoline baseline, with no trajectory to ever recover.
As for energy security, the goal was noble, but the method was irrational. Corn ethanol is critically dependent upon fossil fuels at every stage of production — tractor and truck fuel, fertilizer and pesticides, biorefinery energy and chemicals. Biofuels in general are just a way to put a green fig leaf on petroleum by rerouting it through a farm field.
RELATED: How the Union Pacific merger could revitalize America’s rail industry
Brandon Bell/Getty Images
While corn ethanol production has plateaued at 15-16 billion gallons for the past 10 years — not coincidentally matching the federal subsidy limit — domestic crude oil production has skyrocketed due to technological innovations.
The U.S. is once again energy self-sufficient and the world’s largest producer of crude oil and natural gas. In 2024, the U.S. exported 100 billion gallons of refined petroleum. Other countries are burning U.S. gasoline in their cars and producing the same CO2 emissions as Americans would be if they were allowed to use it.
One of the great ironies is that RFS was authorized under the Clean Air Act. The EPA’s own 2010 regulatory impact analysis showed it would increase net air pollution and cause up to 245 more U.S. deaths per year. The EPA also granted corn ethanol a perpetual vapor pressure waiver for smog-causing emissions that it has denied to petroleum.
Perhaps worse, ethanol in gasoline enables the hydrocarbons to mix with water and thereby increase ground water and surface water contamination from fuel leaks to a far greater degree than the demonized MTBE it replaced.
A government program that has strayed so far from its objectives should be terminated. The federal agency in charge of protecting the nation’s environment should not be allowed to administer a program that increases air pollution and stresses on water, land, and climate. Fuel should be fuel and food should be food.
Surely Congress can find a better way to promote U.S. energy security and boost rural economies without imposing the highly regressive tax of increased fuel prices, inflicting such harm to the nation’s air and water resources, and promoting global food insecurity.
Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.
Co2 emissions, Energy policy, Ethanol, Fossil fuel energy, Fuel prices, Gasoline, Motor fuel, Natural gas, Petroleum, Crude oil, Gas prices, Opinion & analysis
